2012-STOA-BB-012-AFF-SaudiArabia …€¦ · Web viewBut Maureen Hoyler, president of the Council...

CASE: TRIO & GEAR UP REFORM

THREE’S A CROWD: THE CASE FOR TRIO & GEAR UP REFORM

By “Coach Vance” Trefethen

Resolved: The United States should significantly reform its policies regarding higher education.

TRIO is a set of federal programs (originally 3, hence “trio,” but more were added later) authorized in the 1960s under the Higher Education Act. GEAR UP (late 1990s) is another separate but similar program later added to the HEA. These programs together spend around $1 billion per year to help disadvantaged students get ready for, enroll in, and finish college. Be aware that some of the programs do apply to students before they get to college, but they are still “higher education” policies, since they are defined as such by Congress, being put into the HEA and being designed to help these students get college degrees. The programs give grants to states and institutions to spend on things like mentoring, after school tutoring, special classes, summer activities, help filling out financial aid forms, etc. The problem is that none of the programs have any substantial proof that they are effective at actually getting disadvantaged kids through college. Fifty years later, there should be some evidence that they work, but disadvantaged kids are still not getting into nor graduating from college at very high rates.

Researchers Haskins & Rouse propose a 5-step reform plan that consolidates these into a single program with some of the funding dedicated to research and a requirement that any grants be given only to programs that have been studied and proven effective. At best, only effective programs would be funded and more disadvantaged students would get better results. At worst, no projects would be proven effective and the federal deficit would be reduced, since nothing would get funded. No one would be harmed, since the Status Quo isn’t helping anyone anyway.

Possible Negative responses are:

1) Minor Repair: More funding for existing programs. Haskins & Rouse argue that we ought to already be seeing results from the $1 billion we’re already spending, so we should reform it first.

2) Studies show Status Quo is effective: But many of the studies are flawed. Much of the Neg argumentation will be either flawed studies or else individuals who simply insist from their own opinion that the programs work without any statistical evidence supporting it.

3) More study needed: Sounds good, but the only way you’ll get more study is with the AFF plan. In the backup evidence, we show that the SQ is actively blocking more study. Seems the advocates for the SQ programs are afraid of what we’ll find if we study these programs too much.

Note: Different sources describe TRIO as four, six, or even more programs. Some of this depends on the date of the evidence (the number of programs changed over time). Some of it also depends on how they count the programs, since some of them have sub-programs that are sometimes counted separately.

Three’s A Crowd: The Case For TRIO Reform...................................................................................................4OBSERVATION 1. We offer the following DEFINITIONS................................................................................................4

Policy:.................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4“Higher Education policies”:.................................................................................................................................................................4

OBSERVATION 2. INHERENCY, the structure of the Status Quo. Two key FACTS.......................................................4

FACT 1. The TRIO programs................................................................................................................................................4They’re federal programs designed to help disadvantaged students get college degrees.....................................................................4

FACT 2. GEAR UP................................................................................................................................................................5

COPYRIGHT © MONUMENT PUBLISHING PAGE OF MONUMENTPUBLISHING.COM

This release was published as part of Season 18 (2017-2018) school year for Policy Debaters. See the member landing page for official release date and any notifications. This is proprietary intellectual content and may not be used without proper ownership.


Gaining Early Awareness & Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, another federal program to promote college success for disadvantaged students..........................................................................................................................................................................5

OBSERVATION 3. FAILURES............................................................................................................................................5

FAILURE 1. TRIO and GEAR UP fail..................................................................................................................................5TRIO and GEAR UP have spent billions of dollars mostly failing to get more disadvantaged students through college...................5

FAILURE 2. Students miss out..............................................................................................................................................6

OBSERVATION 4. Our PLAN implemented by Congress, the President and the Secretary of Education:........................6

OBSERVATION 5. The ADVANTAGE: Disadvantaged Students more likely to succeed.................................................6A. The Reform: The 5 step Haskins & Rouse reform is key to reversing 50 years of failure......................................................6B. The Impact: Without college, low income students will fact a life of financial struggle.................................................................8

2A Evidence: TRIO and GEAR UP Reform.........................................................................................................9DEFINITIONS & BACKGROUND......................................................................................................................................9

Significant:............................................................................................................................................................................................9More specifics on what TRIO programs do..........................................................................................................................................9GEAR UP is part of the Higher Education Act, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, Chapter 2.......................................................................9Often associated with TRIO, GEAR UP is another federal program aimed at increasing college success for poor students............10

SOURCE INDICTMENT....................................................................................................................................................10Council for Opportunity in Education: Advocates TRIO but actively blocks studies of its effectiveness.........................................10

INHERENCY.......................................................................................................................................................................11TRIO and GEAR UP programs try to help disadvantaged students get college degrees....................................................................11The TRIO programs cost $900 million per year.................................................................................................................................11TRIO + GEAR UP = over $1 billion per year, the largest college-preparation program from any single source..............................12

FAILURES...........................................................................................................................................................................12

TRIO overall........................................................................................................................................................................12TRIO and GEAR UP show little evidence of meeting the goal of college readiness for disadvantaged students..............................12The only valid study of federal college-prep programs says they don’t work. It’s a set of mostly-failed programs with a few modest successes.................................................................................................................................................................................13

Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC).............................................................................................................................13Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review: No evidence of results from EOC. No goals, no targets, no proof of effectiveness........................................................................................................................................................................................13

Upward Bound.....................................................................................................................................................................14UB is another failed “Great Society” program....................................................................................................................................14Upward Bound has no measurable benefits........................................................................................................................................14Best Evidence: Mathematica Study found UB had no detectable effect, and Dept of Education validated it....................................15A/T “Mathematica study found UBMS increased graduation rates” – Study was reviewed and found to be flawed........................16Upward Bound generally fails to have statistically measurable impact..............................................................................................17

Upward Bound Math & Science (UBMS)...........................................................................................................................18A/T “Mathematica study found UBMS got more students through college” – Methodology was flawed.........................................18

Talent Search (TS)...............................................................................................................................................................19A/T “Mathematica study” – Study did show improvements, but its results are not conclusive and methodology was flawed.........19

MINOR REPAIR RESPONSES..........................................................................................................................................20A/T “More funding to existing programs” - $1 billion should do a lot. If it’s not working, we should reform.................................20

SOLVENCY / ADVOCACY...............................................................................................................................................20Setting standards and changing ineffective programs are key to finding what works........................................................................20




A/T “What if nothing qualifies to get funded?” – We get a new Advantage. Less spending = lower federal deficit, and we help the economy.................................................................................................................................................................................20

ADVANTAGES...................................................................................................................................................................21College is key to achieving the American dream for low-income students........................................................................................21

Works Cited............................................................................................................................................................22




THREE’S A CROWD: THE CASE FOR TRIO REFORM

A wise man once said the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Please join my partner and me as we affirm that: The United States should significantly reform its policies regarding higher education.

OBSERVATION 1. We offer the following DEFINITIONS.

Policy:

“a high-level overall plan embracing the general goals and acceptable procedures especially of a governmental body” (Merriam Webster Online Dictionary, copyright 2017 http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/policy)

“Higher Education policies”:

Any policies contained in the federal Higher Education Act of 1965 and its subsequent amendments.

OBSERVATION 2. INHERENCY, the structure of the Status Quo. Two key FACTS

FACT 1. The TRIO programs

They’re federal programs designed to help disadvantaged students get college degrees

Cassandria Dortch 2016 (analyst in education policy with Congressional Research Service) “The TRIO Programs: A Primer” 11 Jan 2016 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf

The TRIO programs are the primary federal programs providing support services to disadvantaged students to promote achievement in postsecondary education. The TRIO programs were so named by the 1968 Higher Education Act (HEA) amendments, which consolidated a trio of programs under one title. This report provides a description of the TRIO programs, authorized in Title IV-A-2-1 of the HEA, as amended by the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA; P.L. 110-315) in 2008.



https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/policy


FACT 2. GEAR UP

Gaining Early Awareness & Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, another federal program to promote college success for disadvantaged students

Federal Register 2017 (official publication of the US government) 10 Mar 2017 Applications for New Awards; Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (Partnership Grants) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/03/10/2017-04798/applications-for-new-awards-gaining-early-awareness-and-readiness-for-undergraduate-programs

OBSERVATION 3. FAILURES.

FAILURE 1. TRIO and GEAR UP fail.

TRIO and GEAR UP have spent billions of dollars mostly failing to get more disadvantaged students through college

Libby Nelson 2013 (journalist) 8 May 2013 INSIDE HIGHER ED “Tough Words for TRIO” https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/08/policy-brief-calls-overhauling-gear-trio-programs

Concluding a review of the research into the effects of TRIO programs and GEAR UP, Haskins and Rouse don’t mince words: “Half a century and billions of dollars after these federal college-preparation programs began,” the write, “we are left with mostly failed programs interspersed with modest successes.” The programs all attempt to get more disadvantaged students into, and through, college through counseling and tutoring.



https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/08/policy-brief-calls-overhauling-gear-trio-programs

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/03/10/2017-04798/applications-for-new-awards-gaining-early-awareness-and-readiness-for-undergraduate-programs



FAILURE 2. Students miss out.

Low income students today miss out on college because current programs fail to help

TIME Magazine 2013 (journalist Kayla Webley) 9 May 2013 “We’re Doing a Lousy Job of Getting Poor Kids to College” http://nation.time.com/2013/05/09/were-doing-a-lousy-job-of-getting-poor-kids-to-college/

For low-income students in the United States, the college math is bleak: only one-third of kids from families at or below the poverty line attend college, and even fewer graduate. The Department of Education has committed to improving those numbers, but a new report casts serious doubt on the effectiveness of the government’s efforts. The federal government has four major college prep programs for disadvantaged students: Upward Bound, Talent Search, Upward Bound Math-Science and Student Support Services, collectively known as TRIO. In a policy brief published this week in the journal The Future of Children, researchers from Princeton University and the Brookings Institution synthesized evaluations of each program and found them all “ineffective,” with no impact on getting low-income students to and through college.

OBSERVATION 4. Our PLAN implemented by Congress, the President and the Secretary of Education:

1. Congress votes to reform GEAR UP and TRIO by implementing the 5 step Haskins & Rouse reform plan requiring studies and proof of effectiveness for all programs.2. Funding from existing agencies and existing budgets and consolidated into a single grant program. 3. Plan takes effect October 1 of next year.4. Enforcement through the Secretary of Education. Programs failing to prove effectiveness are denied funding.5. Affirmative speeches may clarify

OBSERVATION 5. The ADVANTAGE: Disadvantaged Students more likely to succeed

A. The Reform: The 5 step Haskins & Rouse reform is key to reversing 50 years of failure

Ron Haskins and Cecilia Rouse 2013 (Haskins is a senior editor of the Future of Children, a senior fellow in Economic Studies and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution, and a senior consultant at the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Rouse is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and Professor, Economics of Education at Princeton Univ) TIME FOR CHANGE: A NEW FEDERAL STRATEGY TO PREPARE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS FOR COLLEGE https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/college_prep_low_income_students_haskins.pdf



https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/college_prep_low_income_students_haskins.pdf

http://nation.time.com/2013/05/09/were-doing-a-lousy-job-of-getting-poor-kids-to-college/


Haskins & Rouse go on in the same context to say QUOTE:




END QUOTE. Haskins & Rouse go on in the same context to say QUOTE:

B. The Impact: Without college, low income students will fact a life of financial struggle

A.C.T. 2016 (non-profit organization that publishes and conducts the “ACT Test” for college entry) 3 Feb 2016 “Lack of Progress for Low-Income Students Signals Need for Collaboration” http://www.act.org/content/act/en/newsroom/lack-of-progress-for-low-income-students-signals-need-for-collab.html

A record number of students from low-income families took the ACT® test, but their progress toward reaching key college readiness benchmarks remained unchanged and significantly below national averages for the sixth consecutive year. The findings are from a new report, The Condition of College & Career Readiness 2015: Students from Low-Income Families, released today by ACT and the National Council for Community and Education Partnerships (NCCEP). The report focuses on the academic preparation and postsecondary aspirations of 2015 high school graduates who took the ACT and reported annual family earnings of less than $36,000. Nearly one in four of the 1.9 million ACT-tested 2015 high school graduates identified themselves as low income. “Until these results improve, many students from poorer families are likely destined for a life of financial struggle and lapsed educational plans,” said Jim Larimore, ACT chief officer for the advancement of underserved learners.



http://www.act.org/content/act/en/newsroom/lack-of-progress-for-low-income-students-signals-need-for-collab.html


2A EVIDENCE: TRIO AND GEAR UP REFORM


DEFINITIONS & BACKGROUND

Significant:

“having or likely to have influence or effect” (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary copyright 2017 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/significant)

More specifics on what TRIO programs do

Cassandria Dortch 2016 (analyst in education policy with Congressional Research Service) “The TRIO Programs: A Primer” 11 Jan 2016 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf

The federal TRIO programs provide support services and some financial assistance primarily to low-income, first-generation college students to help them succeed academically and encourage them to advance through much of the educational pipeline. The TRIO programs work together to provide a pipeline of support services from secondary school through undergraduate and graduate education. Each of the TRIO programs is designed to serve a different target population of participants through a different level of education. The following subsections describe the purpose, eligible recipients, program participants, program intensity and activities, and outcome criteria of each of the TRIO programs and are ordered according to their sequence in the educational pipeline: UB primarily supports the college preparation of secondary students, TS primarily supports the postsecondary enrollment of secondary students, EOC primarily supports the postsecondary enrollment of adult students, SSS primarily supports the completion of undergraduate education, McNair primarily supports graduate school prep

GEAR UP is part of the Higher Education Act, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 2, Chapter 2

US Dept of Education, last updated 2017. “Programs – Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP)” last modified 6 March 2017 https://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/legislation.html



https://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/legislation.html


https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/significant


Often associated with TRIO, GEAR UP is another federal program aimed at increasing college success for poor students

GEAR UP North Carolina State Office 2012 (ethical disclosure about the date: the article is undated but contains internal references indicating it was written in 2012) https://qawww2.northcarolina.edu/sites/default/files/documents/gear_up_nc_implementation_guide_section_1_-_overview_0.pdf

SOURCE INDICTMENT

Council for Opportunity in Education: Advocates TRIO but actively blocks studies of its effectiveness

Andrew Kreighbaum 2017 (journalist) “Cutting College Prep” INSIDE HIGHER ED 28 Mar 2017 https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/28/questions-about-efficacy-college-prep-programs-white-house-vows-evidence-based-cuts

But Maureen Hoyler, president of the Council for Opportunity in Education, which advocates for TRIO programs, said 83,000 students would be affected across the board. “You can’t finagle around this level of cuts,” she said. Hoyler said TRIO programs have alumni in congressional districts across the country who would make the case to lawmakers for maintaining funding. But some researchers said there could be stronger evidence for the effectiveness of those programs were it not for COE’s own efforts on the Hill. A 1999 study by Mathematica Policy Research updated in 2004 found mixed results for Upward Bound. A second study had become so controversial by 2008 that Congress, in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, barred the department from completing the study. Russ Whitehurst, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, said COE responded by pushing for restrictions on randomized assignment of students to TRIO programs for the purposes of evaluation. Congress, after lobbying by COE, barred the Department of Education from requiring that grant recipients agree to randomized assignments of students.



https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/28/questions-about-efficacy-college-prep-programs-white-house-vows-evidence-based-cuts


https://qawww2.northcarolina.edu/sites/default/files/documents/gear_up_nc_implementation_guide_section_1_-_overview_0.pdf



INHERENCY

TRIO and GEAR UP programs try to help disadvantaged students get college degrees


The TRIO programs cost $900 million per year

Cassandria Dortch 2016 (analyst in education policy with Congressional Research Service) “The TRIO Programs: A Primer” 11 Jan 2016 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf (brackets added)

The TRIO programs were so named by the 1968 HEA amendments, which consolidated a trio of programs that supported the educational achievement of disadvantaged students under one title. The number of TRIO programs has since expanded to six, and they were funded at a total of $900 million in FY [fiscal year] 2016. Collectively, the TRIO programs are designed to identify qualified individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, prepare them for a program of postsecondary education, provide support services for postsecondary students, motivate and prepare students for doctoral programs, and train individuals serving or preparing for service in the TRIO programs. TRIO services support the federal policy goals of secondary school completion, college preparation, college enrollment, undergraduate completion, and graduate school preparation. There are six main TRIO programs (in descending order of funding levels): TRIO Upward Bound (UB) Program, TRIO Student Support Services (SSS) Program, TRIO Talent Search (TS) Program, TRIO Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) Program, Ronald E. McNair Postbaccalaureate Achievement (McNair) Program, and TRIO Staff Development (Training) Program.






TRIO + GEAR UP = over $1 billion per year, the largest college-preparation program from any single source


FAILURES

TRIO overall

TRIO and GEAR UP show little evidence of meeting the goal of college readiness for disadvantaged students

Lindsey Burke 2014 (Director, Center for Education policy and Will Skillman Fellow in Education at Heritage Foundation) 19 Aug 2014 Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act—Toward Policies that Increase Access and Lower Costs http://www.heritage.org/education/report/reauthorizing-the-higher-education-act-toward-policies-increase-access-and-lower

Better target resources by repealing the authorizations of the GEAR UP and TRIO programs (Title IV). The HEA also authorizes the GEAR UP and TRIO programs, which provide college counseling, mentoring, and tutoring services. These programs add to already high levels of higher education spending, and there is little evidence they have met their goals of increasing college readiness for disadvantaged students. As such, they should be eliminated and instead handled at the state and local level.



http://www.heritage.org/education/report/reauthorizing-the-higher-education-act-toward-policies-increase-access-and-lower




The only valid study of federal college-prep programs says they don’t work. It’s a set of mostly-failed programs with a few modest successes


Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC)

Office of Management & Budget (OMB) review: No evidence of results from EOC. No goals, no targets, no proof of effectiveness

Cassandria Dortch 2016 (Analyst in Education Policy, Congressional Research Service) January 11, 2016 The TRIO Programs: A Primer https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf






Upward Bound

UB is another failed “Great Society” program

David B. Mulhausen 2013 ( research fellow in empirical policy analysis in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis ) Do Federal Social programs Work? https://books.google.com/books?id=HezXAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=%22upward+bound%22+fail&source=bl&ots=ViMITJ3JR7&sig=ZIDRfJIc8dR3cyMKOQp8cS5vlTE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnsuitPzVAhXEVyYKHSsoCT84ChDoAQhbMAk#v=onepage&q=%22upward%20bound%22%20fail&f=false

Upward Bound has no measurable benefits

David B. Mulhausen 2013 ( research fellow in empirical policy analysis in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis ) Do Federal Social programs Work? https://books.google.com/books?id=HezXAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=%22upward+bound%22+fail&source=bl&ots=ViMITJ3JR7&sig=ZIDRfJIc8dR3cyMKOQp8cS5vlTE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnsuitPzVAhXEVyYKHSsoCT84ChDoAQhbMAk#v=onepage&q=%22upward%20bound%22%20fail&f=false



https://books.google.com/books?id=HezXAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=%22upward+bound%22+fail&source=bl&ots=ViMITJ3JR7&sig=ZIDRfJIc8dR3cyMKOQp8cS5vlTE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnsuitPzVAhXEVyYKHSsoCT84ChDoAQhbMAk#v=onepage&q=%22upward%20bound%22%20fail&f=false







Best Evidence: Mathematica Study found UB had no detectable effect, and Dept of Education validated it






A/T “Mathematica study found UBMS increased graduation rates” – Study was reviewed and found to be flawed

Note: “IES” is Institute of Education Services, part of the US Dept of Education






Upward Bound generally fails to have statistically measurable impact

David B. Mulhausen 2013 (Research fellow in empirical policy analysis in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis ) Do Federal Social programs Work? https://books.google.com/books?id=HezXAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=%22upward+bound%22+fail&source=bl&ots=ViMITJ3JR7&sig=ZIDRfJIc8dR3cyMKOQp8cS5vlTE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnsuitPzVAhXEVyYKHSsoCT84ChDoAQhbMAk#v=onepage&q=%22upward%20bound%22%20fail&f=false







Upward Bound Math & Science (UBMS)

A/T “Mathematica study found UBMS got more students through college” – Methodology was flawed

Ron Haskins and Cecilia Rouse 2013 (Haskins - senior editor of the Future of Children, a senior fellow in Economic Studies and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution, and a senior consultant at the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Rouse is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and Professor, Economics of Education at Princeton Univ) TIME FOR CHANGE: A NEW FEDERAL STRATEGY TO PREPARE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS FOR COLLEGE https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/college_prep_low_income_students_haskins.pdf





Talent Search (TS)

A/T “Mathematica study” – Study did show improvements, but its results are not conclusive and methodology was flawed






MINOR REPAIR RESPONSES

A/T “More funding to existing programs” - $1 billion should do a lot. If it’s not working, we should reform


SOLVENCY / ADVOCACY

Setting standards and changing ineffective programs are key to finding what works.

Writing in context about the Affirmative plan, TIME magazine in 2013 said QUOTE:


Rouse and co-author Ron Haskins, co-director of the Center on Children and Families at Brookings, suggest that only programs that have demonstrated positive results should retain funding, comparing it to ineffective medicine being pulled from the shelves. “If your doctor prescribes to you a medicine that’s supposed to help your headaches and you have just as many headaches, is that really the right drug to be taking?” Rouse said. “These programs should be held to the same standard. If there’s no change in outcome for students who completed the program, then we need to do something different to make sure we are actually helping the students who we said we were trying to help.”

A/T “What if nothing qualifies to get funded?” – We get a new Advantage. Less spending = lower federal deficit, and we help the economy

Dr William Gale and Benjamin Harris 2011. (Gale - PhD in economics, Stanford Univ.; senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center; former assistant professor in the Department of Economics at UCLA, and a senior economist for the Council of Economic Advisers under President George H.W. Bush; Harris - master’s degree in economics from Cornell University and a master’s degree in quantitative methods from Columbia University; senior research associate with the Economics Studies Program at the Brookings Institution) “A VAT for the United States: Part of the Solution” http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/freefiles.nsf/Files/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf/$file/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf

But even in the absence of a crisis, sustained deficits have deleterious effects, as they translate into lower national savings, higher interest rates, and increased indebtedness to foreign investors, all of which serve to reduce future national income. Gale and Orszag (2004a) estimate that a 1 percent of GDP increase in the deficit will raise interest rates by 25 to 35 basis points and reduce national saving by 0.5 to 0.8 percentage points of GDP. Engen and Hubbard (2004) obtain similar results regarding interest rates.



http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/freefiles.nsf/Files/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf/$file/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf




ADVANTAGES

College is key to achieving the American dream for low-income students


“For most people the opportunity to move up economically depends on getting a college degree,” said Sean Reardon, a professor of education and sociology at Stanford whose research has shown that the achievement gap between students from high-income and low-income families has grown by 40% in the last 30 years–making it much larger than the gap between white and black students. “College is still very much the way to achieve the American Dream.”




WORKS CITED: TRIO AND GEAR UP REFORM

WORKS CITED

1. Cassandria Dortch 2016 (analyst in education policy with Congressional Research Service) “The TRIO Programs: A Primer” 11 Jan 2016 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42724.pdf

2. Federal Register 2017 (official publication of the US government) 10 Mar 2017 Applications for New Awards; Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (Partnership Grants) https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/03/10/2017-04798/applications-for-new-awards-gaining-early-awareness-and-readiness-for-undergraduate-programs

3. Libby Nelson 2013 (journalist) 8 May 2013 INSIDE HIGHER ED “Tough Words for TRIO” https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/08/policy-brief-calls-overhauling-gear-trio-programs

4. TIME Magazine 2013 (journalist Kayla Webley) 9 May 2013 “We’re Doing a Lousy Job of Getting Poor Kids to College” http://nation.time.com/2013/05/09/were-doing-a-lousy-job-of-getting-poor-kids-to-college/

5. Ron Haskins and Cecilia Rouse 2013 (Haskins is a senior editor of the Future of Children, a senior fellow in Economic Studies and co-director of the Center on Children and Families at the Brookings Institution, and a senior consultant at the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Rouse is dean of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and Professor, Economics of Education at Princeton Univ) TIME FOR CHANGE: A NEW FEDERAL STRATEGY TO PREPARE DISADVANTAGED STUDENTS FOR COLLEGE https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/college_prep_low_income_students_haskins.pdf

6. A.C.T. 2016 (non-profit organization that publishes and conducts the “ACT Test” for college entry) 3 Feb 2016 “Lack of Progress for Low-Income Students Signals Need for Collaboration” http://www.act.org/content/act/en/newsroom/lack-of-progress-for-low-income-students-signals-need-for-collab.html

7. US Dept of Education, last updated 2017. “Programs – Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs (GEAR UP)” last modified 6 March 2017 https://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/legislation.html

8. GEAR UP North Carolina State Office 2012 (ethical disclosure about the date: the article is undated but contains internal references indicating it was written in 2012) https://qawww2.northcarolina.edu/sites/default/files/documents/gear_up_nc_implementation_guide_section_1_-_overview_0.pdf

9. Andrew Kreighbaum 2017 (journalist) “Cutting College Prep” INSIDE HIGHER ED 28 Mar 2017 https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/03/28/questions-about-efficacy-college-prep-programs-white-house-vows-evidence-based-cuts

10. Lindsey Burke 2014 (Director, Center for Education policy and Will Skillman Fellow in Education at Heritage Foundation) 19 Aug 2014 Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act—Toward Policies that Increase Access and Lower Costs http://www.heritage.org/education/report/reauthorizing-the-higher-education-act-toward-policies-increase-access-and-lower

11. David B. Mulhausen 2013 ( research fellow in empirical policy analysis in the Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis ) Do Federal Social programs Work? https://books.google.com/books?










https://www2.ed.gov/programs/gearup/legislation.html





https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/05/08/policy-brief-calls-overhauling-gear-trio-programs




WORKS CITED: TRIO AND GEAR UP REFORM

id=HezXAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA149&lpg=PA149&dq=%22upward+bound%22+fail&source=bl&ots=ViMITJ3JR7&sig=ZIDRfJIc8dR3cyMKOQp8cS5vlTE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjmnsuitPzVAhXEVyYKHSsoCT84ChDoAQhbMAk#v=onepage&q=%22upward%20bound%22%20fail&f=false

12. TIME Magazine 2013 (journalist Kayla Webley) 9 May 2013 “We’re Doing a Lousy Job of Getting Poor Kids to College” http://nation.time.com/2013/05/09/were-doing-a-lousy-job-of-getting-poor-kids-to-college/

13. Dr William Gale and Benjamin Harris 2011. (Gale - PhD in economics, Stanford Univ.; senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and co-director of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center; former assistant professor in the Department of Economics at UCLA, and a senior economist for the Council of Economic Advisers under President George H.W. Bush; Harris - master’s degree in economics from Cornell University and a master’s degree in quantitative methods from Columbia University; senior research associate with the Economics Studies Program at the Brookings Institution) “A VAT for the United States: Part of the Solution” http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/freefiles.nsf/Files/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf/$file/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf



http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/freefiles.nsf/Files/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf/$file/GALE-HARRIS-5.pdf




2012-STOA-BB-012-AFF-SaudiArabia …€¦ · Web viewBut Maureen Hoyler, president of the Council...

Documents

Transcript of 2012-STOA-BB-012-AFF-SaudiArabia …€¦ · Web viewBut Maureen Hoyler, president of the Council...